improper election of board member

[Abqgram]

at the annual meeting board members were elected by ballot. nominees were presented and accepted from the floor. There were more nominees than positions available.

a former board member was elected. It later was "noticed" that this person was not eligible to run because he had already served his two consecutive terms.

Certain members decided among themselves to accept the election because this member got more votes than some. Now other board members are questioning that action and wondering what to do - notify the full membership of the mistake? Or what? There were at least two other nominees eligible one of whom would have been elected if this person had not run for the board.

Is this a mistake that must be lived with for coming year?

[Kim Goldsworthy]

At the annual meeting board members were elected by ballot.

...

It later was "noticed" that this person was not eligible to run because he had already served his two consecutive terms.

Certain members decided among themselves to accept the election because this member got more votes than some.

Now other board members are questioning that action and wondering what to do - notify the full membership of the mistake?

Or what?

There were at least two other nominees eligible one of whom would have been elected if this person had not run for the board.

Is this a mistake that must be lived with for coming year?

Let me get this straight.

Your members want to blatantly violate your bylaws, all year long?

Your members don't respect rules, and don't respect your bylaws?

And you want advice as "what are the rules, when members aren't interested rules?"

I doubt all the citations of RONR will make an impact in your organization, with that kind of disrespect for "qualifications for office".

If you don't respect "qualifications for office", then why have them? What's the point? Where is the respect?

[David A Foulkes]

Let me get this straight.

Your members want to blatantly violate your bylaws, all year long?

Your members don't respect rules, and don't respect your bylaws?

And you want advice as "what are the rules, when members aren't interested rules?"

I doubt all the citations of RONR will make an impact in your organization, with that kind of disrespect for "qualifications for office".

If you don't respect "qualifications for office", then why have them? What's the point? Where is the respect?

It's too bad you didn't put some of this energy into even trying to answer the question rather than denigrating not only the entire membership as well as the poster.

There are always those who seek to ignore the rules for whatever gain, and fortunately those who say "hey, hold on a minute, that ain't right...." Fortunately many of them find their way here seeking help and advice.

A careful read of the original post will clearly show there are members who are questioning the validity of the election and want to properly reverse it. And Abuela would not be here (with her first post!) were she not interested in following the rules as well.

Where is the respect? Indeed.

[Chris Harrison]

at the annual meeting board members were elected by ballot. nominees were presented and accepted from the floor. There were more nominees than positions available.

a former board member was elected. It later was "noticed" that this person was not eligible to run because he had already served his two consecutive terms.

Certain members decided among themselves to accept the election because this member got more votes than some. Now other board members are questioning that action and wondering what to do - notify the full membership of the mistake? Or what? There were at least two other nominees eligible one of whom would have been elected if this person had not run for the board.

Is this a mistake that must be lived with for coming year?

Do your bylaws actually impose a limit of two consecutive terms in office? If so a Point of Order can be raised at a meeting of the body where the Board members were elected that this Board member was improperly elected because he has reached his term limit (RONR p. 244a). However, that Point of Order may be ruled Not Well Taken depending on what the bylaws do say. You say this person was not eligible to run (and he is no longer running since the election is over) which is a different thing than not being eligible to hold office (which continues until he leaves office). One is a continuing breach for which RONR p. 244(a) applies to and one is not.

[Abqgram]

In the interest of keeping the question brief I failed to say that I am the newest member on the board and also new to the organization. further, I am NOT a voting member. As soon as I was elected (6 weeks ago) and before I knew of this problem, I suggested that the board consider using RONR - the board is only 7 people.

this is a homeowners board. Most members have been on board for YEARS!

I DID search on the forums for an answer.

I am a strong but inexperienced advocate of RONR but have not needed to "use" it for about three years - and was just beginning to learn how to use it when the need went away..

This is a helpful forum - most of the advice on I saw on other problems was very useful, just not quite applicable to my situation. Obviously this board is in dire need of help and becoming RONRs. Once THIS problem is solved I hope to convince the board to start learning how to use RONR.

So back to the REAL problem - WHAT to do about this? If I go in as heavy handed as Goldsworthy, all that will happen is make the board mad and then good bye to RONR!

It's too bad you didn't put some of this energy into even trying to answer the question rather than denigrating not only the entire membership as well as the poster.

There are always those who seek to ignore the rules for whatever gain, and fortunately those who say "hey, hold on a minute, that ain't right...." Fortunately many of them find their way here seeking help and advice.

A careful read of the original post will clearly show there are members who are questioning the validity of the election and want to properly reverse it. And Abuela would not be here (with her first post!) were she not interested in following the rules as well.

Where is the respect? Indeed.

[Abqgram]

Oops - it was NOT Mr. Foulkes who was so irritated - he was the considerate one! SORRY Mr. Foulkes!

In the interest of keeping the question brief I failed to say that I am the newest member on the board and also new to the organization. further, I am NOT a voting member. As soon as I was elected (6 weeks ago) and before I knew of this problem, I suggested that the board consider using RONR - the board is only 7 people.

this is a homeowners board. Most members have been on board for YEARS!

I DID search on the forums for an answer.

I am a strong but inexperienced advocate of RONR but have not needed to "use" it for about three years - and was just beginning to learn how to use it when the need went away..

This is a helpful forum - most of the advice on I saw on other problems was very useful, just not quite applicable to my situation. Obviously this board is in dire need of help and becoming RONRs. Once THIS problem is solved I hope to convince the board to start learning how to use RONR.

So back to the REAL problem - WHAT to do about this? If I go in as heavy handed as Foulkes, all that will happen is make the board mad and then good bye to RONR!

[Chris Harrison]

So back to the REAL problem - WHAT to do about this?

First of all you all need to decide whether your status as a non-voting member in any way affects your other rights of membership (such as raising a Point of Order and Appealing any adverse decision). Next, if you all determine that your rights are not affected beyond not having a vote is to raise a Point of Order as I mentioned above. However, read my above post closely because as I pointed out the wording of the bylaws will be crucial as to whether the Chair (properly) should rule the Point Well Taken.

[Abqgram]

DAVID FOULKES - THANK YOU FOR YOUR WISE DEFENSE!!

First of all you all need to decide whether your status as a non-voting member in any way affects your other rights of membership (such as raising a Point of Order and Appealing any adverse decision). Next, if you all determine that your rights are not affected beyond not having a vote is to raise a Point of Order as I mentioned above. However, read my above post closely because as I pointed out the wording of the bylaws will be crucial as to whether the Chair (properly) should rule the Point Well Taken.

[Abqgram]

DAVID FOULKS - THANK YOU FOR YOUR WISE DEFENSE!!

[Abqgram]

CHRIS H. THANK YOU

- I could still use a little more advice!!! The board does not follow RONR.

So far, my suggestion to them will be that this is a mistake that consitutes a point of order and that with the approval of the president, we could accept the resignation of the person improperly elected. Then, since that person is a valuable member appoint him as a committee chair.

Then next year he would be eligible to run and be elected.

In the meantime maybe I could convince the board to learn to use RONR and amend the bylaws to make Roberts a part of them.

Do you think this is a viable and hopefuly proper way to fix the problem?

[Chris Harrison]

The board does not follow RONR.

That can raise a problem since RONR would not be binding but it still can be cited as persuasive.

So far, my suggestion to them will be that this is a mistake that consitutes a point of order and that with the approval of the president, we could accept the resignation of the person improperly elected.

No on two fronts. First the President is merely one vote and doesn't not have the authority (under RONR) to unilaterally accept a resignation (unless the bylaws say otherwise). Second, it would not be proper to have the member resign because he was not validly elected to an office to resign from.

Then, since that person is a valuable member appoint him as a committee chair.

I don't see that as being a problem as long as it can be properly done.

Then next year he would be eligible to run and be elected.

Sounds good.

In the meantime maybe I could convince the board to learn to use RONR and amend the bylaws to make Roberts a part of them.

That would be a very good place to start.

[David A Foulkes]

In the meantime maybe I could convince the board to learn to use RONR and amend the bylaws to make Roberts a part of them.

And not just the board, but you and the membership. It doesn't hurt when everyone knows the rules, and doesn't fall into the trap of allowing a select few to tell them what is and isn't in there. Bylaws as well. It really is a responsibility of every member to be familiar with, and even have a copy of, them. Best of luck.